For various reasons, including the increasingly transient nature of employment, people are generally finding that they have a need to change one or more of their contact details on an increasingly regular basis.
For example, amongst the younger recently employed generation, it is not unusual for home ownership to be delayed with housing needs satisfied by rental accommodation. For older generations, with employment arrangements usually only lasting two to three years before either a change in employment or change in location occurs, contact details are also more frequently in need of updating as compared with generations past.
A particularly good example of this problem occurs when users of a postal service change their address and it becomes necessary to provide the new address details to every entity that has previously sent, or may need to send, postal items to the user. To address this problem, postal services around the world usually provide a “change of address” service wherein a user completes a change of address form, lodges it with the postal service and all postal items directed to the user at their old address are intercepted and redirected to the new address. This is usually effected by the postal service intercepting postal items to the user's old address and the application of an adhesive label to the postal item with the user's new address. Generally, users will request the “change of address” service to be implemented for a sufficiently long period of time to enable them to formally advise their new address details to all related entities that have a record of their old address. Of course, there are entities that will regularly send postal items to the user and whilst the “change of address” service is implemented by the postal service, the user will receive redirected items of post from that entity which will act as a reminder to the user to formally advise that entity of their new address details.
However, there are entities that will send postal items on an irregular and/or infrequent basis and hence may not send an item of post to the user whilst the “change of address” service is in effect with the postal service. In order to reduce instances of neglecting to notify all related entities, the user may implement the “change of address” service for an extended period of time (e.g. more than twelve (12) months) in order to provide a sufficient period of time in which to receive postal items from entities that may only send items of mail to them on an irregular and/or infrequent basis. In some instances, users maintain their own lists of entities to notify in the event of a change of address to avoid implementing a re-direction service.
The usual “change of address” services offered by postal systems are clearly problematic in that there is a cost associated with requesting and implementing a “change of address” service and the longer the period of time that this service is in effect, the greater the cost to the user. Further, unless the user implements the “change of address” service for a substantially long period of time, there is always a risk that they will neglect to formally advise one or more related entities of their change of address details. Further, users may need to commit a substantial amount of time and effort advising all the related entities of their change of address which can involve completing different forms and procedures for each entity.
The ineffectiveness of current “change of address” services is also problematic for organizations that seek to send items of post to users as part of their usual communication or for marketing purposes. In some instances, users may have elected to receive information by post of events and/or products/services that would be of interest to them. This type of postal item is a particularly good example of an item that would be sent to a user on an irregular and/or infrequent basis and it is in the best interest of the organization to be aware of the user's new address as any marketing information or literature that is sent to the wrong person or address represents an unnecessary cost to the organization that they seek to minimize.
The present arrangements for organizations to record a users change of address is also problematic with respect to the cost and likelihood of error associated with manual entry of data. When a user submits change of address details, effort, and hence cost, is incurred processing the new details. For example, when new details are advised by post, the organization is required to open the envelope, process the correspondence and pass it to the appropriate personnel to manually alter the organizations' computer records to reflect the user's new details. Clearly, for organizations that receive a large number of requests to change users details, the cost can be significant.
In an attempt to address this problem, some postal services around the world provide a list of organizations to users that the postal service will advise of a change to their address details. Unfortunately, the list is usually relatively short and only comprises those organizations that have entered into a specific arrangement with the postal service to enable the transfer of new address details electronically. Further, each organization on the list that a user can select may require additional and/or different information to identify the user to the organization. This could take the form of a membership number or a policy number, etc.
Accordingly, the usual service offering by postal systems to alert related entities of a user's change of address details fails to effectively address the problem and does not provide a user with a list of all related entities (whether individual users or organizations) that have previously sent, or may need to send, items of post to them, and continues to require a substantial amount of time and effort on the part of the user.
Any discussion of documents, acts, materials, devices, articles or the like which has been included in this section of the present specification is solely for the purpose of providing a context for the present invention. It is not to be taken as an admission that any or all of these matters form part of the prior art or were common general knowledge in the field of the invention as it existed before the priority date of any of the claims herein.